Many of the writing styles which are recognized in rhetorical and composition theories involve deep syntactic elements in style [Bain 1887]

Many of the writing styles which are recognized in rhetorical and composition theories involve deep syntactic elements in style [Bain 1887]

Many of the writing styles which are recognized in rhetorical and composition theories involve deep syntactic elements in style Bain 1887, Kemper 1987 Strunk and White 2008. There are different approaches to the stylistic analysis of texts but for the purpose of this research Leech and Short’s 1985 approach was used for the analyses. The method is based on linguistic checklist that focuses on the analysis of literary texts which can as well be applicable to nonliterary texts. The Leech and Short 1985 approach is used because it provides the detail levels of analysis. This approach helped to look at the use of language of politics, the variations, how the politicians generally select language etc. In the texts, phrases are stylistically used by the politicians, possibly to colour the speeches and attracting the attention of the people in order to develop a curiosity that will make them listen to the end of the story.
There are expressive means and stylistic devices of the language which are based on the important structure of a speech. At the same time, speeches in context have their own specific structural design and have specific emotional coloring. Galperin 1977, 193 points to the following conclusion from the study of the structural units of speeches which are:
1) It is the structural element of the utterance that predetermines the possible semantic aspect;
2) structural elements have their own independent meaning which may be called structural or grammatical;
3) Structural meaning may affect the lexical, giving contextual meaning to some of the lexical units.
Syntactic stylistic devices as complicated constructions, try to attract the listener and influence on the listener as desired. That is why the concrete syntactic structure consists of various stylistic devices – repetition, inversion, chiasmus, parallelism, enumeration, etc.
Stylistic devices are basically similar in all languages, but the meaning of these devices in speeches may differ. Equal stylistic devices have different usage in different languages; so they perform different functions, so they have different meanings in the stylistic structure of the language, and this explains the necessity of their transformation in translation. Stylistic changes have the same need for grammatical or lexical. When using any grammatical or lexical transformation in translation, the translator must follow the rule of translating the grammatical or lexical meaning. But in translation of the stylistic meaning of the text, the translator must follow the rule by making the translation of the same effect as in the source text.
It is not obligatory for translator to save the same stylistic device specified in the sentence but show its function in the translated text. It is also important to remember that basically all stylistic devices are multifunctional. That is why when we compare stylistic devices we can easily identify whether devices correspond completely, partly or do not correspond at all.
The research we have made shows that the speeches of American and British politicians are characterized by a variety of devices that make the speech more convincing and expressive. The research shows that the basically stylistic devices which are used in political speeches are parallel constructions, repetition, enumeration, antitheses, gradation, polysyndetone, asindetone, inversion and rhetorical question.
Parallel construction, is a balance within one or more sentences of similar phrases or clauses that have the same grammatical structure Wikipedia. Parallelism gives to the political speech a certain rhythm, and similar (parallel) constructions underline the needful word or phrase, which is repeated in parallel constructions.